Dual wield

[Nopkar]

-snip-

i was going to bring this up. it’s unrealistic, but we have zombies etc etc etc. realism at this point is moot.

the only problem NOW is balance. 2 guns are better than one for purpose of a turn based roguelike. how can we balance something that breaks other forms of play and makes them worthless WITHOUT making dual wielding worthless as well?

I feel confident duel wielding will be added in the future, but as of now the combat system isn’t nearly complete enough to handle something like this.

(the above comments are complete speculation and opinion.)

[halberdsturgeon]

I don’t like dual wielding. Not because it’s unrealistic, but because it’s been done to death and I find it quite lame.

[Nopkar]

I don’t like dual wielding. Not because it’s unrealistic, but because it’s been done to death and I find it quite lame.

I don’t care for it either but i’m not adverse to having it in the game and other people use it. I don’t like light strips but here they are!

more options = more fun in my book. have at em

[Flare]

[quote=“ejseto, post:45, topic:1268”]-snip-

i was going to bring this up. it’s unrealistic, but we have zombies etc etc etc. realism at this point is moot.[/quote]

As far as I can take away from the game, it’s as unrealistic as possible when it is trying to kill you and make your life hard, and as realistic as possible to make your survival a bitch.

Que every single thing that can kill you being present in the game, and make boiling water requiring you to run into a town where half of everything that can kill you is waiting because you didn’t put that point into survival at the beginning.

[Nopkar]

[quote=“Nopkar, post:46, topic:1268”][quote=“ejseto, post:45, topic:1268”]-snip-

i was going to bring this up. it’s unrealistic, but we have zombies etc etc etc. realism at this point is moot.[/quote]

As far as I can take away from the game, it’s as unrealistic as possible when it is trying to kill you and make your life hard, and as realistic as possible to make your survival a bitch.

Que every single thing that can kill you being present in the game, and make boiling water requiring you to run into a town where half of everything that can kill you is waiting because you didn’t put that point into survival at the beginning.[/quote]

This my friend is cataclysm. the lack of logic is seconded only by dwarves for only they truly know how to break the world.

[xxrogxx]

BEST IDEA

[ejseto]

the only problem NOW is balance.

There’s a fairly easy way to balance this, and half of it is already in the game. First, an off-hand accuracy penalty (they could add an ambidexterity perk to cancel this). Second, recoil, which is already in the game. Recoil from each pistol should be cumulative and affect BOTH pistols (they could even add in an additional multiplier as a further penalty). Thus, while you can increase your rate of fire (inaccurately), you are also doubling the effects of recoil, increasing recoil on your main-hand for the minor benefit of being able to shoot inaccurately with your off-hand.

The important thing here is that this is a choice with benefits and drawbacks. For realism’s sake, there probably should not be many situations in which dual-wielding pistols has a net benefit. But there should be some, because realistically there are some situations where the penalties to aiming and recoil would be overshadowed by the benefit of having twice the firepower.

[iceball3]

Stuff discussed in this thread have me thinking, shouldnt pretty much EVERY single zombieform get no bonud or even a penalty to evasiveness. Given that they are zombies, i’d assume they don’t actually actively defend thenmselves, so…
also kiting, while (painfully) effective also seems to fall under the same idea for zombies, as a tactically viable idea makes no sense that a zombie dog would do that, especially as it conflicts even natural behavior of dogs.

back on the topic of akimbo… what about shields akimbo?

[Flare]

back on the topic of akimbo… what about shields akimbo?

The only shields that this would be viable with is with small metal bucklers or small leather bound shields the size of a plate. It’d be essentially just a tiny bit better than boxing.

[Reaper]

Yesterday download sources and do simple dual wield for handguns. In game recoil mechanism prevents very accurate shooting on big range, so the balance is OK, I think;)
When pass the exams try to finish it.

[iceball3]

[quote=“Reaper, post:55, topic:1268”]Yesterday download sources and do simple dual wield for handguns. In game recoil mechanism prevents very accurate shooting on big range, so the balance is OK, I think;)
When pass the exams try to finish it.[/quote]Shouldn’t there have been an off hand holding system in place first, so items in off hand can be better managed to start?

[Reaper]

iceball3
Not quite understand:)
I say, how did:
Bind 2 new keys:
-to swap items between main hand and offhand
-to switch fire in dual wield mode
Add offhand field to class “Player” at swap items item in main hand moving to offhand and item in offhand - in main hand.
To place item in offhand need wield item and swap items between hands.
Dual fire algorithm:
Fire (moves-=moves_for_fire/2)
Swap_weapons
Fire (moves-=moves_for_fire/2)

Shot with a 2xglock 19 : recoil prevent very accurate fire.
Make all it was pretty easy - was pleasantly surprised:)

[Reaper]

What about close combat dual wield?
Offhand weapon may use for block (chance to block based on weapon volume, amount of blocks on melee skill) or for counterattack (chance and amout based on melee skill)

[Senrain]

Uh, duel wielding firearms is definitely a no-no for me. Not only is it horridly inaccurate but it makes reloading and clearing malfunctions with a gun very difficult. The only time where holding two guns could be feasibly effective is if accuracy was a non-issue, such as engaging a target at nearly point blank or using shotguns if you’re built like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Even dual wielding melee weapons could be tricky, since not many people are all that dextrous with both of their hands. Only use for it that I can think of is for blocking or a backup to switch to your dominant hand if your primary weapon gets stuck.

Overall, I’m against duel wielding firearms being implemented. A big maybe to melee weaponry duel wielding. If the devs are actually considering it, I’d like to be able to use riot shields found in police stations, kite shields found in mansions, and the ability to craft my own shields using materials.

[Flare]

Even dual wielding melee weapons could be tricky, since not many people are all that dextrous with both of their hands. Only use for it that I can think of is for blocking or a backup to switch to your dominant hand if your primary weapon gets stuck.

More so than a lack of congenital issues, it’s a very inefficient use of leverage, striking power, and reach than simply using a large two handed weapon. Most parries work because the person being parried would have to back off because going further would mean they open themselves up to counter attack, or the parry throwing off their balance. A zombie has no sense of self preservation that parrying an arm of their away would make them stop their attack.
You’re not fighting something that is looking after itself, has any sense of self preservation, or any understanding of tactics like the conservation of strength. Fancy fighting styles with elaborate blocks and parries meant to scare off an attack is a poor choice.

A two handed weapon would not only make use of the strength in both arms, but the stance is also such that you can throw a great deal more weight into your strike than the one in which you have to always be ready with one arm to parry.

[Reaper]

There is dilemma: more attack power or more defence.
If You want more defence you use offhand weapon to parry, if no - use it for counterattack, if want be cool - use big two-handed hammer or something else.
For firearms - more firepower or more accuracy.
I just want do possibility to fire at random with two hands by that, who want it. Others can look at them as a idiots and shoot as they like. The same thing for close combat.
If such opportunities will exist it will not spoil your fun?

[Flare]

[quote=“Reaper, post:61, topic:1268”]There is dilemma: more attack power or more defence.
If You want more defence you use offhand weapon to parry, if no - use it for counterattack, if want be cool - use big two-handed hammer or something else.[/quote]

I would disagree, the stronger, longer, and faster features of a 2 handed weapon gives it a great deal of defensive ability over using two smaller weapons at once… More specific though, in hand to hand combat offensive ability does transfer a lot into defensive ability. The leverage you have when you’re using two hands on a single weapon is far above that of two single handed weapons, in short, you would be able to parry much stronger strikes aimed at you, hit first, and hit much harder when you do.

But all of this only applies to opponents that will react when you threaten their life or a portion of their body. A zombie or almost everything else in the game apart from NPCs won’t stop it’s attack just because you’ve got an opening and can disembowel it, or break one of its arms, or cut its hamstrings. Your best bet is just to hit first, hit hard, and strike with precision and these are the main features of two handed weaponry over single handed ones.

[Reaper]

Flare,
Yes, two-handed melee weapon keep enemy on safe distance, if enemies is not many and if weapon is not very heavy. Sledgehammer for weak man is not good weapon for parry, but garbage can lid - good. Also in close combat, at point-blank range, defence with large weapon is not easy. For example, if three dogs fast attack you, easier to defend from them with not large stick.
I think do next:

Large weapon may push back one or two enemies back or counterattack once.
If push back check fall - it can’t push back attacking enemies - you may do one step back from attack and try to parry again.
Pushed back enemies lost certain number of movement point/fall/get damage.
If player has amount strenght for use large weapon - push back enemy once is very easy. For next attacker is more difficult.

Small weapon / shield on off hand may block attack one or two times or counterattack ore or two times. Blocks don’t hurt attackers. Missed attacks is not prevent future blocks. Chance to block is not big.

[Flare]

[quote=“Reaper, post:63, topic:1268”]Flare,
Yes, two-handed melee weapon keep enemy on safe distance, if enemies is not many and if weapon is not very heavy. Sledgehammer for weak man is not good weapon for parry, but garbage can lid - good. Also in close combat, at point-blank range, defence with large weapon is not easy. For example, if three dogs fast attack you, easier to defend from them with not large stick.[/quote]

A sledge hammer weighs about 10-20lbs. A sword weighs 5-7. There is a massive difference between those two. two handed swords aren’t as heavy as some people make them out to be.

There are also techniques when the opponent gets too close in, what you essentially do is half the sword. You grab the sword by the middle with one hand and turn it into a quarter staff.

[KA101]

[quote=“Flare, post:64, topic:1268”][quote=“Reaper, post:63, topic:1268”]Flare,
Yes, two-handed melee weapon keep enemy on safe distance, if enemies is not many and if weapon is not very heavy. Sledgehammer for weak man is not good weapon for parry, but garbage can lid - good. Also in close combat, at point-blank range, defence with large weapon is not easy. For example, if three dogs fast attack you, easier to defend from them with not large stick.[/quote]

A sledge hammer weighs about 10-20lbs. A sword weighs 5-7. There is a massive difference between those two. two handed swords aren’t as heavy as some people make them out to be.

There are also techniques when the opponent gets too close in, what you essentially do is half the sword. You grab the sword by the middle with one hand and turn it into a quarter staff.[/quote]

Yeah, I’ve got a hard/rubber greatsword: it ain’t light, but it’s fairly maneuverable. I’d imagine I could slash some ass with practice, but it’s understandably difficult to find practice opportunities for a frickin’ greatsword in a US city.

That said, grabbing a sword by the blade seems like a bad idea. I hope you’re wearing gauntlets?